Corneal Outcomes Following Cataract Surgery Using Ophthalmic Viscosurgical Devices Composed of Chondroitin Sulfate-Hyaluronic Acid: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chia-Wen Hsiao,1 Hang Cheng,1 Rana Ghafouri,2 Nicole C Ferko,2 Brandon D Ayres3 1Alcon, Fort Worth, TX, USA; 2Eversana, Burlington, ON, Canada; 3Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USACorrespondence: Nicole C Ferko, Eversana Life Science Services, 3228 S Service Road, Burlington, ON, Canada, Tel +1 (905) 978-3111, Email nicole.ferko@eversana.comBackground: Ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) are commonly used during cataract surgery to protect the corneal endothelium. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the clinical evidence of OVDs composed of chondroitin sulfate-hyaluronic acid (CS-HA) versus other OVDs in maintaining endothelial cell density (ECD) and corneal thickness (CT).Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from 2000 to 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs, N ≥ 20 per group) comparing an OVD containing CS-HA (ie, VISCOAT®, DuoVisc® or DisCoVisc®) to any other OVD were included. The identified comparators were limited to the OVDs found in the literature, which included those composed of HA-only or hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC). Outcomes of focus included changes in ECD (baseline to 3 months) and CT (baseline to 24 hours). Meta-analyses were performed using R software, to assess mean differences (MD) in ECD and CT change between CS-HA OVDs and HA-only or HPMC OVDs.Results: A total of 966 abstracts were screened, and data were extracted from 12 RCTs. Meta-analyses using a random-effects model revealed significantly lower percent (%) decrease in ECD for CS-HA OVDs compared to both HA-only (MD: − 4.10%; 95% CI: − 5.81 to − 2.40; p < 0.0001; 9 studies) and HPMC (MD: − 6.47%; 95% CI: − 10.41 to − 2.52; p = 0.001; 2 studies) products. Similarly, % CT increase was significantly lower with CS-HA than with HA-only OVDs (MD: − 3.22%; 95% CI: − 6.24% to − 0.20%; p = 0.04; 4 studies). However, there were no significant differences when comparing % CT change between CS-HA and HPMC OVDs (MD: 2.65%; 95% CI: − 0.43% to 0.95%; p = 0.4; 2 studies).Conclusion: CS-HA OVDs lead to less postoperative loss of endothelial cells and may better protect corneal endothelium during cataract surgery, relative to other OVDs. Future randomized studies may be needed to solidify these findings.Keywords: cataract, ophthalmic viscosurgical device, endothelial cell density, corneal thickness, endothelial protection
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".